3 ms·
I'd say to do the exact opposite. As a developer, you have a duty to play rules lawyer with compatibility-- who is going to be better equipped than you to deal
by hakfoo 2y ago
I'd say to do the exact opposite. As a developer, you have a duty to play rules lawyer with compatibility-- who is going to be better equipped than you to deal with the bug reports?
Build the weirdest thing that meets the nominal spec. Import a Zhaoxin processor and mainboard. Put a Battlemage GPU on it. Play on Slackware Linux under WINE.
On a more practical approach, I feel like there's a business idea there: a service that offers cloud access to an array of unusual but legitimate configurations-- new CPU/old GPU and vice versa, SLI/Crossfire/secondary encoding/physics GPU configurations, machines with x16 cards wedged into x1 slots, machines running weird OS combinations (LTSC and similar, images that have been pre-abused by popular "debloat/fix" and "unofficial patchset" tools).
If it can survive the gauntlet, it will probably do fine on most normal happy-path "it's a recent Core i5 and GTX4060 with recent drivers running on Win11 Home" configurations.
- MrLeap 2y agoI agree with you in spirit. What I've done is dev on proc/gpu that's common but 5 years out of date. My processor's AMD and my gpu is a 3060. I've got 64gb of ram though, which I don't think is exactly ubiquitous yet (Steam stats say 95% of people have less ram). That said, developer/editor builds tend to have a -15% to -40% headwind. All combined I am in the trenches with most, hardware experience wise. I want the games I make to work for everyone. That said, I don't write the drivers or develop the engine, and I'm reasonably poor.